Post #252 History, Pt. III

I got some comments covering the past 50 years of Presidents from an e-pal that he picked up on a blog somewhere and wanted my opinion -- so: First, interesting -- a good starting point, but I thought the commentator played arm-chair psychiatrist too much -- I'm more interested in what each President did or did not do in office. This is Pt. III. My additional responses and additions... in [brackets]....

* * *

CLINTON - Arguably the most intelligent and thoughtful President ever to hold office, Bill Clinton's poor judgement doomed his time in office from the outset. Initially optimistic and enthusiastic supporters had great expectations - the town hall meetings conducted between Election and Inaugural Days were invigorating. The performance, afterward, was a massive letdown.

Clinton promised a major energy policy initiative - and failed to follow through. he promised a major urban revitalization program, a major effort with education, health care and numerous other policies, and failed to deliver. Instead, Clinton wasted his initial political capital with the "Don't Ask, don't Tell" policy, activating opposition from all sides. he then took an overblown and impossible health care project on and used up what residual goodwill he owned before the 1994 elections.

After that, the ultra-right campaign under Newt Gingrich to cripple Clinton went into full swing, and the battle was never let up - it continues to this day, now aimed at Obama. Clinton's bad judgment and personal dishonesty only made matters worse during the Lewinsky affair. Ultimately, Clinton did achieve more than many today admit, but the taint of his failures follows him like a bad smell.

[;O -- A good summary. But I give Gingrich more credit for the balanced budgets than the writer probably does -- 50/50, but Clinton showed his political mastery by blaming Gingrich for the government shutdown. That should doom Gingrich's chances in 2012. Who wants a President who'll shut down the government?]

BUSH II - No President has ever done a worse job in office, damaged the nation's international standing more, or lied and manipulated the country more than George W. Bush. He led the country into the Iraq war on a platform of lies...

[Well, the "lies" were as a result of incompetence -- peeps in his own government were warning him about his overheated rhetoric concerning WMD in Iraq, but he was too lazy to reach out for contrary opinions -- instead of evil, but that is a distinction that doesn't need to be made. Ask the over 4000 who died for Bush's lies if that distinction is important. A lie is lie.]

... for reasons that were never disclosed to the nation.

[I doubt if Bush knows why.]

He abandoned the more important war in Afghanistan, which in its early successes had had a chance of being completed well and effectively before Bush's diversion allowed Al Quaeda and the Taliban to regroup and damaged irretrievably the faith of Afghanis in American commitment to the country.

[That is a good summary of our adventure in Afghanistan. Bush lost that war. Tho the war initially was justified, once we lost -- let Bin Laden escape, what is our justification for staying?]

Bush attempted to buy votes in 2001 with his ill-advised "rebates." His tax policies increased burdens on the middle class. His abandonment of environmental regulations wrought physical ruin and death across the nation. His absolute incompetence in office was evident long before the horrendous crisis after Hurrican Katrina.

[I had assumed that Bush was a decent guy but was being steamrolled by the darker influences in his Administration. But Hurricane Katrina showed that Bush just did not care. Nero fiddled while Rome burned -- where was Bush while New Orleans drowned? He was strumming his guitar on stage at a Republican fundraiser in San Diego.]

His insouciant urging of the nation to run up massive mounds of debt, coupled with utter lack of regulatory oversight of the financial industry (among others) culminated in global economic crisis. He manipulated national elections in 2000 and 2004 and is arguably the only President since Rutherford B. Hayes to hold office in spite of truly losing the election.

[The 2004 campaign was full of lies and smears and fear-mongering -- ya know, the usual stuff. I have no problem with 2004 -- we got what we deserved.]

[However, Bush was an illegitimate President during his first term. Not because he lost the popular vote nation-wide and not because Florida's electoral votes were in dispute but Bush was an illegitimate President during his first term because he was appointed by the Supreme Court instead of following the law -- ironically, the law was in Bush's favor.]

Post #251 History, Pt. II

I got some comments covering the past 50 years of Presidents from an e-pal that he picked up on a blog somewhere and wanted my opinion -- so: First, interesting -- a good starting point, but I thought the commentator played arm-chair psychiatrist too much -- I'm more interested in what each President did or did not do in office. This is Pt. II. My additional responses and additions... in [brackets]....

* * *

REAGAN - Today almost beatified by Conservatives and other admirers, in office Ronald Reagan was extremely controversial, widely disliked, and inconsistent. He began in 1976 attempting to build a coalition to revitalize the Republic Party, which had been (incorrectly) declared at death's door as the Presidential returns were counted. Reagan made a number of alliances with very conservative faction leaders and fundamentalist Christian leaders - making promises on issues that he did not keep once in office.

During the Iranian hostage crisis, Reagan violated the spirit, if not also the letter, of the law by making secret arrangements to deliver arms and other benefits to Iran if the American hostages were kept until after the election - assuming, of course, that Reagan won that election. As he completed his oath of office in January, 1981, the airplanes carrying the released hostages touched down in northwest Africa, payoff for a despicable act that opened an Administration marked by corruption and criminal convictions and many more international adventures in defiance of Amecan laws and customs.

[Did Reagan cheat to win? Well, he was certainly trading arms for hostages in violation of official policy and funding 'the Contras' in violation of the law -- only unlike Richard Nixon, he was not exposed until it was too late, late in his second term when it was considered too politically damaging to have an impeachment.]

[You know me, damn politics -- let's follow the law. I would have loved to have seen the Gipper on trial -- maybe he would not be so revered today if peeps had of seen him put on his 'out-of-the-loop' defense.]

Reagan did not end the Cold War, as some claim (Gorbachev did that). His investments in military technology and reorganization were indeed vital, and unmatched by the Soviet Union, but they were also corrupt contracts in many cases.

[I have no problem with giving Reagan his due in defeating 'the bear in the woods' -- as long as it is recognized that 'the bear' was wounded and bleeding from its misadventure in Afghanistan. Reagan lucked into the right time to try "Peace through Strength" -- but it worked out. All's well. :)]

Reagan's massive deficits were, by one account published in the 1990's, a deliberate attempt to bankrupt the country so that Libertarian conservatives could succeed in closing down much of the government and eliminating every social program from Medicare to welfare and the Public Health Service.

[Just because something bad happens -- or almost happens, does not mean there is a conspiracy behind it. Libertarian conservatives are not that stupid. Before you shut down government and eliminate social programs, you'd better shut down the 2nd Amendment. "When in the course of human events..."]

Reagan's adoption of Milton Friedman's concept of "free market" policies led to deregulation which resulted in 30 years' worth of economic disaster, business collapses, and the current global economic crisis. In 1988, the greastest single-day drop in stock prices almost precipitated another Depression, and did eventually lead to the Reagan-Bush recession that lasted for more than two years.

[For me, the economy is personal -- how much I add to my own private retirement account. I have been adding a small steady amount for the past 20 years -- the only time I've had enough disposable cash to significantly increase my contribution was during the balanced budgets of the Clinton years. There is a lesson there. What I've learned about "trickle-down" is that the benefits do not trickle down but the bills sure do.]

[No, I do not think much of Reagan. Unfortunately, Republicans think they've hit on a winning formula -- "anti-minorities" for those non-minority voters and "free money" for those wealthy voters in the form of tax cuts, deregulation and deficits. When it all goes belly-up -- as it always does, google 'ronald reagan black monday,' guess who pays?]

BUSH I - This President was entirely disconnected from American society. He revealed he never went grocery shopping when he was astonished at a supermarket checkout laser reader. His social policies were driven entirely by a desire to continue in the Reagan path, his failure to support environmental protection, workplace protection and many other initiatives opposed by business nearly devastated the EPA, OSHA and other agencies, and his persistent inability to pursue economic policies to help end the recession led to the ruin of millions of American families and small businesses. The cities of Dallas, Phoenix, Denver, St. Louis and others especially affected by this recession took nearly a decade to recover.

[I do not put much stock in his failure to go grocery shopping, but, boy, his following of Reagan's social policies sure hurt. But he broke with Reagan by signing 'the largest tax increase in history' -- well, then. Oh, sure, it offended many Reaganites, but I give him credit for recognizing that "voodoo economics does not work -- and he gets credit for coining the phrase "voodoo economics."]

Bush's mixed signals to Saddam Hussein in the period leading up to the first Gulf War resulted in Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in the belief the U.S. would not actually do anything about it.

[I criticize Bush for launching a unConstitutional war -- then and now. But I always thought Bush was the better half of Reagan/Bush.]

Post #250 Vote 4 Da Rich Whitey -- Ya Know Ya Wanna! :p

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/10/rich-whitey-misspelling-that-just.html

Well, most politicians ARE rich whiteys -- just wondering how close that hit to home! ;O

Post #249 Richard Burr, Part Of The Problem

There is a political advertisement airing in this state about the re-election of Senator Richard Burr, a smiling Republican -- yes, I mean "smiling" in a negative way. I think Burr has out-smarted himself, tho.

The ad starts out by appealing to the populist 'Tea Party' sentiment against big government -- two ol' geezers straight out of central casting are sitting on front porch in rocking chairs and railing against politicians and the political establishment of D.C. A woman steps forward to calmly and quietly campaign for Burr.

My Dad didn't hear her. He was too busy railing against "that Damn Richard Burr... who ain't done squat for North Carolina." If Burr had his way. North Carolina would have been without $8.9 billion in stimulus money. Maybe we could have had tent cities and soup kitchens. [rolleyes]

I'd thought Burr would share the North Carolina value of not voting for something without paying for it -- the only exception is during a time of Constitutionally-declared war. But Burr fell in with the other smiling Republicans and voted for, as a Representative, George W. Bush's inflated and unbalanced budgets and, as a Senator, Bush's infamous Plan D for Medicare -- the largest expansion of government into health care since the start of Medicare, an expansion that wasn't paid for. And Burr blames President Obama for his own irresponsibility.

That's why the ad for Burr's opponent, Elaine Marshall, makes sense: "It's time for a change!"

Post #248 Government Run Amok!

Personally, I would like to see John Edwards hounded to his unmarked grave. But the news that federal prosecutors have issued new subpoenas in their probe of former Senator Edwards' 2008 Presidential campaign finances gives me pause.

What was the crime? I bet the grand jury that has been investigating for over a year is wondering the same thing.

Yes, it disgusts me to think that Edwards paid 'hush money' out of his campaign funds to cover up his affair with that "freak," Rielle Hunter -- to use Edwards' own word. But guess what? Um, 'hush money' IS political and thusly an appropriate use of campaign funds.

I think what we have is an out-of-control prosecutor who will continue to abuse his governmental office until he gets something to stick.

Post #247 History

I got some comments covering the past 50 years of Presidents from an e-pal that he picked up on a blog somewhere and wanted my opinion -- so: First, interesting -- a good starting point, but I thought the commentator played arm-chair psychiatrist too much -- I'm more interested in what each President did or did not do in office. My additional responses and additions... in [brackets]....

* * *

KENNEDY - JFK was a conservative hawk with a very strong anti-Communist theme to
his policies. His inauguration speech was almost a war warning to the Soviets. Although he did not plan nor get too deeply involved in the Bay of Pigs fiasco, it was laid at his feet because he did not approve of pushing that invasion any further and withheld some anticipated air and sea support from the invasion. His very determined and careful management of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis was probably the high point of his entire administration. His work on civil rights was reluctant but had begun movement forward in 1963. Perhaps his greatest legacy was the inspiration he gave to the country.

He had little opportunity in the 2 1/2 years in office (before assassination) to develop his domestic programs, and was more caught up in foreign affairs. It appears from an historical perspective that JFK was on the verge of reducing or ending U.S. involvement in Vietnam when he was killed - and several historians believe that was why he was killed.

[Do not blame your goofy ideas on "several historians." We all know it was 'the mob' who killed Kennedy. :p]

JOHNSON - There may not have ever been a President as complex as Lyndon Baines Johnson - at once crude, heavy-handed and overbearing, and also personally insecure, more sensitive to the problems of poverty and injustice than most admit today, and highly-motivated by a craving for approval. Johnson emerged from an earlier career in one of the country's most racist states to nearly single-handedly end 100 years of oppressive official racism and establish the concept of civil rights as a bedrock principle of American philosophy for ALL persons.

[ ~ Give him a standing ovation. ~ ]

Despite some cronyism and problems with the corruption of a few of his closest friends and advisors (remember the chinchilla coat?), Johnson led a reasonably honest and effective administration. His "Great Society" programs, even weakend by opponents terrified of empowering the poor, were actually successful in many ways - and today at least Head Start survives.

[Um, isn't Medicare a "Great Society" program? After all, Medicare is, as Senator Chuck Grassley famously said, part of the "social fabric."]

His greatest weakness was fear that a U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam would tar his legacy as President - and Vietnam indeed did so, but for the opposite reason.

[ ~ Sit down. ~ Do not forget that Johnson lied to get us into that war -- "Gulf of Tonkin" anyone? -- and couldn't withdraw without admitting his lie. Sound familiar? A President who lies deserves a special place in....]

Johnson's astonishing mastery of the legislative process and ability to reach down to the Hill is unmatched in U.S. history. Thus his time in office was capped with the landmark Civil Rights Act, and the creation of Medicare.

NIXON - No President ever better understood the national political process better than Nixon, but no President was ever worse-suited to attempt its manipulation. Ultimately, Nixon had no god but himself, and that destroyed him. He had no compunction about lying to the nation or to himself, a hallmark of his first Administration that is almost entirely forgotten today. His personal weaknesses, at the core of which was a desperate and nearly paranoid insecurity, caused Nixon to become more isolated and more vicious in response to critics as time went by. His 1972 re-election campaign was a vile exercise in attack, retribution, manipulation and deviousness.

[And Nixon tried to cheat to win -- ironically, not necessary. That is what Watergate was all about. And he took 'ownership' of Vietnam.]

Nixon achieved an astonishing result with his rapprochement with China - undertaken for weltpolitik purposes to help split Russia and China. He also made what had begun as promising initiatives to deal with the Middle East, but ultimately failed thanks to his preoccupation with domestic problems. The 1973 Arab Oil Embargo was more than a disaster for Americans, it exposed the United States as vulnerable in ways that helped encourage the development of Middle East terrorism, which has bedeviled the country since long, long before 9/11/2001.

FORD - Gerald Ford, vilified by many for his pardon of Nixon, was a caring, gentle and humane person perfectly suited, although purely by accident, to fill the Presidency when Nixon resigned. His good humor, genuine interest in the nation, and respect for his office probably saved the Presidency after the ruin Nixon's "imperial" style had wrought upon the office.

[Ford was a good guy -- more proof that nice guys finish last... or at least second.]

Unfortunately, Ford as a mildly conservative Republican was unsuited to develop and pursue policies that were then pressing, ranging from new standards for auto safety and economy to environmental protection, from reorganizing and rebuilding the military after the debacle of Vietnam (which came to a sorrowful end during his Administration) to effectively directing America's response to the great flood of Southeast Asian immigrants after Saigon fell. Ford's worst moment in office was not the Mayaguez incident, but the "Whip Inflation Now" button that proved he had no idea what to do about an economy in ruins.

CARTER - Jimmy Carter is most unjustly pilloried by the right wing and considered generally a failure in office. Yet he was the first and nearly only President to achieve significant progress in the Middle East, rebuild American prestige and respect abroad, finally launch a comprehensive program of environmental protection, take initiatives to improve worker health and safety on the job, protect new mothers (and fathers) when time off was needed after birth, and pursue dozens of other important, human domestic policies.

Unfortunately, Carter was also a technocrat more interested in process than in political leadership. He was not much of an admirer of America's military, and thus did not attend to the corrosion in the ranks or the officer corps caused by the debacle of Vietnam. Further, he was unwilling during times of considerable economic stress to invest heavily in development of advanced weapons systems or other improvements in pay and circumstances of military personnel. The 1979 oil embargo was but one of several developments that doomed his reputation and his reelection.

[And it was the Iranian hostage crisis -- unfairly exploited by his opponent -- that doomed him. More on this later....]